Andrew McIntyre wrote:
Taking this over to derby-dev...
On 9/11/06, Kathey Marsden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Many of these regressions sadly have already made their way into 10.1.3
and therefore are being picked up by users for production. I
think we need to notify the user community of the situation, try to get
more user input on 10.2 and flush out more regressions. We port fixes
to 10.1 to try to get it to a stable state and then release 10.2. Also
any ideas anyone has for new optimizer tests would be good and folks
could write those.
Those are all my ideas for now. It could be that lots of users have
tried 10.2 without problems but haven't reported in and then it is just
a matter of getting them to speak up.
I don't think we should hold up the 10.2 release except for known
regressions. I think it's a chicken-and-egg problem. Users aren't
motivated to try out the beta, because it's extra time and effort on
their part, so you aren't actually informed about regressions until
the regression is in a release that people actually try to use. Better
to release early so new code gets into actual user's hands so
regressions can be flushed out sooner. Regressions happen, and no
release is ever go to be perfect (although that would be nice,
wouldn't it?).
Better to release often so code where regressions have been identified
and fixed get into user's hands sooner.
I think releasing early and often is an area we as a community, and
individually through the tasks we take on for any particular release,
could improve.
andrew
I agree with Andrew, unless there are known regression to be fixed, it
is not practical to wait for the users to report if there are any
issues with 10.2. Or there need to be some kind of time frame when
the beta testing closes.
/suresh
